The High Court in Kampala has dismissed an application by senior lawyer John Matovu seeking to halt his prosecution over allegations that he caused a financial loss of 7.79 billion Shillings in war loss compensation funds to Busoga Growers Cooperative Union Limited.
Justice David Makumbi dismissed the application, ruling that Matovu’s constitutional challenge was premature and that his concerns over the evidence and alleged violations of his rights should first be raised before the trial court handling the criminal case.
Matovu had petitioned the High Court under the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act and several provisions of the Constitution, arguing that his prosecution before the Anti-Corruption Division violated his constitutional right to practise his profession and interfered with advocate-client confidentiality.
He also argued that the criminal proceedings amounted to an abuse of the legal process because Busoga Growers Cooperative Union, which he said was the beneficiary of the funds, had neither lodged a complaint against him nor alleged that it had suffered any financial loss through fraud, theft or misappropriation.
The prosecution stems from allegations that between 2018 and 2023, in Kampala and Jinja, Matovu, while acting as an attorney for Busoga Growers Cooperative Union, failed to remit 7.79 billion Shillings received from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives as war loss compensation intended for the Union.
Matovu is charged with causing financial loss contrary to Section 19(1) of the Anti-Corruption Act. He is jointly charged with three other people, including Busoga Growers Cooperative Union chairperson Charles Basoga and Jinja District Commercial Officer James Muganza. Another lawyer, Fred Makada, faces separate charges of theft by agent.
According to the prosecution, Basoga, while serving as chairperson of the Union between 2018 and 2023, received 569.5 million Shillings in war loss compensation funds, which he allegedly misappropriated for personal use, knowing or having reason to believe that the conduct would cause financial loss to the Union.
The prosecution further alleges that Muganza, while serving as Jinja District Commercial Officer, abused his authority by arbitrarily receiving 250 million Shillings. Matovu and Makada are separately accused of theft by agent involving 4.051 billion Shillings and 1.2 billion Shillings, respectively.
Matovu has maintained that he received, held and disbursed the funds as an authorised agent of the Union in the course of his professional duties. He also argued that the information and documents relied upon by the State were protected by legal professional privilege under Article 27(2) of the Constitution.
He asked the High Court to dismiss the criminal proceedings, lift his bail conditions, return his passport, refund his cash bail and award him a sum of 1 billion Shillings in damages. He also sought orders restraining the State from relying on information he claimed was protected by legal professional privilege.
In his ruling, Justice Makumbi drew a distinction between challenging the constitutionality of a criminal charge and challenging the constitutionality of evidence that may subsequently be presented at trial.
The judge held that determining Matovu’s claims at this stage would require the High Court to examine evidence that had not yet been formally presented before the trial court.
“This Court cannot determine the constitutionality of the case against the Applicant before it has been properly laid before the trial Court,” Justice Makumbi ruled. He said Matovu would have an opportunity to challenge any evidence he considers unconstitutional once it is presented during the criminal trial.
Justice Makumbi further held that the mere fact that Matovu had been indicted for causing financial loss did not, in itself, amount to a violation of his constitutional rights.
The judge also rejected Matovu’s attempt to seek constitutional remedies on behalf of Busoga Growers Cooperative Union, noting that the Union was not a party to the application.
According to the ruling, Matovu had not demonstrated that he had specific instructions or a resolution from the Union authorising him to seek constitutional remedies on its behalf.
The court further noted that the Advocates (Professional Conduct) Regulations restrict an advocate from appearing as a witness in a contentious matter concerning a client. Justice Makumbi consequently found that Matovu lacked locus to seek constitutional remedies on behalf of the Union.
The judge declined to grant the remedies sought, holding that the issues raised could properly be considered after the evidence had been presented and evaluated by the trial court.
Justice Makumbi observed that Matovu could pursue other legal remedies depending on the outcome of the criminal proceedings, including possible civil proceedings for malicious prosecution or a fresh human-rights application if circumstances warranted.
The court consequently dismissed the application as premature, lifted the stay on the criminal proceedings and referred the matter back to the Anti-Corruption Division of the High Court for trial. Matovu’s case is among several prosecutions arising from allegations of theft and misappropriation of billions of shillings in cooperative funds.
In a related case, three Members of Parliament, a lawyer, a senior Ministry of Trade official and a cooperative officer are awaiting trial on December 5, 2026, before Lady Justice Jane Okuo Kajuga.
The accused are Igara East MP Michael Mawanda, Elgon County MP Mudimi Wamakuyu and former Busiki County MP Paul Akamba, who are jointly charged with Leonard Kavundira, a Principal Cooperative Officer in the Ministry of Trade, and city lawyer Julius Kirya Taitankoko-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
